Tuesday, May 3, 2016

It's
generally taken for granted by most Christians and social conservatives that, when it
comes to culture, Hollywood is a cesspool of liberalism and degeneracy
which functions as the de facto
propaganda wing of the secular state. Much of its messaging, especially as it
appears in children shows and films, is subtle enough that many tend not
to notice it and dismiss conservative concerns as paranoia. With
Disney's Zootopia, the mask is off.

From
the first frame to the last, the film advances from one liberal conceit
to another without bothering to cloak its overt agenda.

Beginning
with an account of the historical advance of society from primitive and
savage times, when predators devoured prey and the animal kingdom was
ruled by primal instincts, to modern animal times when predator and
prey, having "evolved", live together in peace and harmony, the film
traffics heavily in liberal mythology. From the opening scene, one is
already immersed in an animal version of Whig history.

To
make matters worse, in the same scene a sheep with a rainbow on its
head (clearly representing the LGBT community) appears and declares
that, thanks to this advance from savage primal days to the days of
reason, he no longer lives in fear of "coming out" from among the flock.
The hetero reign of tyranny that is western civilization, in which
aberrant sexualities have always been violently suppressed, is just an
obvious truth. As obvious as the good of promoting the expression of
said sexualities without any objection or reservation (which would be bigotry).

From
there we encounter a common theme in Disney films, as our young,
idealistic, protagonist female bunny, Judy Hopps, feels stifled by her
hick-farmer parents, their rural life, and traditional values. From
Ariel to Jasmine to Merida, petulant adolescent rebellion against
parental authority and the wisdom of tradition has been a staple of the
Disney animated film genre for a long time. It rears its ugly head again
here, as the film openly mocks traditional ways of life -- represented
by the carrot-farmer parents -- as closed-minded and "fearful." In
contrast to this, the young protagonist's cosmopolitan adventurism is
portrayed as a healthy rejection of her parent's way of life, and
probably the only genuine way to live.

Following the motto of Zootopia (the
large animal city, where predator and prey live and work together in
blissful accord), a place where "Anyone Can Be Anything!", the young
female bunny Judy heads off to the big city in order to become a
police(wo)man, providing yet another example of the "strong female character" taking on a characteristically male career.

Don't
ask whether there are sensible reasons certain professions, like police
officer, firefighter, and coal miner, are male dominated, while others
are dominated by women. Assume with us, won't you, that it's the
patriarchy oppressing strong women everywhere, forcing them into
submission as pitiable domestic slaves. Also assume that there are no
such things as characteristically male and female traits, virtues,
skills, and weaknesses. Such thoughts must not be spoken here.

As
we will see later, the film isn't presenting the city's exceptionally
naive motto ("Anyone can be Anything!") as absolutely true, but the
later circumspection merely modifies, rather than contradicts, the basic
message which the motto represents. The self-esteem movement has
created a generation of dysfunctional narcissists, yet cultural elites
still refuse to abandon its fundamental conceit. Namely, that everyone
is a special snowflake whose desires society should cater to and aim to
fulfill.

Once
in the big city, Judy observes an event in which a business owner (an
elephant, which I'm sure just coincidentally corresponds to
the animal which represents the GOP) denies service to a customer,
citing his "We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone" sign.
Appalled by the sight of a business owner exercising his right of free
association in business, our heroine -- while she doesn't pass a law
that would force him to bake the cake (it's actually ice cream) --
threatens him with legal action on an unrelated matter, effectively
pressuring him into serving the customer. Cultural cronyism at work.

If
that weren't preachy and condescending enough, in the very same scene a
young fox thinks he is an elephant, a delusion for which he receives
fawning adulation from surrounding adults. Trans-speciesism among
children is something to be encouraged in Zootopia, let there be no
doubt.

Crowning
the suite of liberal propaganda points, certain predators in Zootopia
(and only predators) have begun to "go savage", seemingly reverting to
their bloodthirsty nature. Judy posits a biological explanation for why
it is only predators going savage, and not prey. Her fox friend, a
predator, is appalled by her speciesism, and the harmony of Zootopia
subsequently devolves into inter-special resentment and distrust thanks
to our heroine's Islamophob-- er, predatoraphobic bigotry. At this point
I looked up the writing credits for the film, expecting to find Angela
Merkel or Justin Trudeau.

But
fear not. Judy dutifully repents of her bigotry, genuflecting deeply
before those she has offended -- even though her conclusion was
eminently justified by all available evidence. But following the
evidence is not always the preferred course of action, and can be misleading, as we later find out. It turns out that the
fact it was only predators "going savage" was the result of a giant
conspiracy! Prey can "go savage" too! Lesson learned: no matter how much
reason and evidence point in a particular direction, there's always a
more convoluted explanation which will account for less, but which
nevertheless is in accord with liberal dogma. Think: "global warming is the primary cause of terrorism."

In
a last-ditch and halfhearted attempt to moderate the film's liberal
extremism, the closing monologue injects a dose of faux humility.
Recognizing the Zootopian motto of "Anyone Can Be Anything!" to be
overly idealistic, due to various weaknesses of animal nature
(weaknesses like tradition and conservatism), the film trades 20th
century leftist utopianism for a duly chastened 21st century liberalism.
Utopia may not be possible as a destination (due to intractable reactionary forces forever opposing 'progress'), but as a goal,
a steady advance towards utopia, along with a continual eradication of
backwards-thinking conservatives and their ideology, is still always
worth pursuing.

Christians and conservatives
have never mistaken Hollywood for a friend, to our credit. The next
step is recognizing it as the openly hostile enemy, the savage beast out
to devour our children, that it plainly is.